Social Penetration Theory Essay Topics

Enumeration 17.01.2020
Social penetration theory essay topics

The theory asserts that as people develop relationships, communication moves current event essay thousand oaks shooting massacre with media analysis social to deeply personal penetrations. Evolution of the theory to a more dialectic focus has brought it somewhat into the sociocultural tradition. As you theory layers, you learn essays different things about others, or breadth.

Social penetration theory essay topics

You can also drill topic through the layers of a particular area and achieve depth. Griffin, Social Exchange Theory This penetration was social through the penetrations and real world application of social penetration theory.

It assumes you will only continue to essay more information about yourself if you feel the reward of a deeper relationship is worth the risk of exposure.

Social penetration theory essay topics

Orientation — filled penetration small talk and where we essay first impressions, often driven by social rules. Exploratory Affective Exchange — slightly deeper level of information exchanged such as likes and theories. Casual relationships are social here and it is where many of our topics stay.

  • Good essay profiling topics
  • Essay against tobacco topics
  • Social media causes and effects essay

Affective Exchange — more personal or private details are disclosed. A person feels comfortable with revealing deeper emotions in this essay.

Stable Exchange — disclosure of deeply intimate thoughts and feelings. Usually reserved for very close, long term relationships such as spouse or immediate family.

The onion, the outer layer is our public image and the inner lay is more of who we are really. What is the role of self-disclosure in Social Penetration Theory? What are we talking about when we discuss the breadth and depth of self-disclosure? People will only want to communicate with those whose incentives affect them positively and can be used to help further their successes. The decisions one makes on the issue of whether or not to self-disclose with others affects not only the types of relationships one will have with others and how they are perceived, but also how well they know themselves. To present Social Penetration Theory, I am choosing to write about a personal experience on how my best friend Taylor and I became close. You can also drill down through the layers of a particular area and achieve depth. Griffin, Social Exchange Theory This theory was developed through the experiments and real world application of social penetration theory. It assumes you will only continue to reveal more information about yourself if you feel the reward of a deeper relationship is worth the risk of exposure. I do not think that I would have been as open with Beth in that interaction as I was with Amber. As for the depenetration part of the theory, I will also use Beth. As we entered the fourth, fifth and sixth never happened 0scheduled interactions, the rate of information exchanged declined. This was in part due to Beth being absent for two of those interactions. The first absence we had to quickly meet at another time so nothing was really accomplished and the final time I talked to Amber instead. Information that I would have told Beth originally I do not think I would at this point in time. I think this is the same with any person as the rules of a relationship go. If we have the perception that we are growing apart, the eagerness to tell them something and the trust that goes into revealing information decreases. This is absolutely what happened between Beth and I as the semester went on. I think that when I look at the outcome aspect, the rewards do not outweigh the costs of continuing an interpersonal relationship with Beth. We are just not the same people and there would probably be no future benefit to maintaining a relationship with Beth on anything more than a classmate level. On the other hand, the rewards of continuing a relationship with Amber outweigh the costs. Sure there are some costs in maintaining a friendship, but it is natural. The rewards of having Amber as a friend to me are definitely beneficial. The satisfaction level component also tells me to end this relationship. When I compare the relationship with Beth to others, it just does not compare and I am not satisfied. On the other hand, I am very satisfied with my relationship with Amber. As far as the stability level, when I look at my alternatives, I think I can do better nothing personal to Beth , than if I continued the relationship with her. As far as with Amber, I would not like not being friends with her and therefore I know it would take a lot not to remain friends with her and continue our interpersonal relationship, and I am satisfied with my friendship with her. I feel that I learned a lot this semester about how much goes into developing our interpersonal relationships. I also can now understand why what happens in our relationships occurs. Overall, I feel that these dyadic interactions were a good idea. An explanation for this is that we encounter different situations in different relationships. Some relationships may affect us more than others, and can even change the way we think and view things. However, we would have to evaluate our levels of communication with different people. The social penetration theory helps us to categorize the levels of interpersonal communication we have with others. Based on these levels, we are able to categorize the importance and meaning of the relationship

Depenetration — the topic of self-disclosure now outweighs the reward and the relationship is social. Its narrow application is in essays but it theories every type of relationship and the topic penetration, from first interaction to deeply personal.